AIB 2012 Conference Proceedings - Academy of International ...

MONDAY
This panel aims to discuss how IB journals currently handle qualitative submissions, how these practices may
have changed in recent years, and possible best practices for the future. In 2011 JIBS signalled important
changes to the way in which it regards qualitative submissions, making this panel particularly timely. Our
panellists – editors from key IB journals (IBR, JIBS, JWB, MIR) – will address the following questions: What are
best practices for managing the review process for qualitative manuscripts What institutional changes and
trends have occurred at their journal What institutional barriers are still faced by qualitative researchers during
the review process Does their journal attract the best qualitative researchers in the field as authors and
reviewers What is the reputation of their journal as an outlet for qualitative articles What role should their
journals play in the future to encourage the publication of high-quality qualitative articles The session will be
run according to a roundtable format. As well as reflecting on the institutional practices at their journals, the
editors will also respond to real-life scenarios reflecting the challenges that qualitative researchers face in
having their work evaluated in the review process. (For more information, please contact: Rebecca Piekkari,
Aalto University School of Economics, Finland: rebecca.piekkari@aalto.fi)
Session: 2.1.11 - Interactive
Track: 11 - SMEs and Entrepreneurship
Institutional Environments, National Culture and Learning
Presented On: July 2, 2012 - 09:00-10:15
Chair: Julie Elston, Oregon State University
A Cross-Cultural Study of the Ease of Doing Business and the Effect of Institutional Environment
Rakesh Sambharya, Rutgers University - Camden
Martina Musteen, San Diego State University
Drawing on the institutional theory, we develop arguments linking the regulatory, normative and cognitive
dimension of local institutional environment to the level of entrepreneurship. Using a sample of 44 countries, we
find support for most of our hypotheses. It appears that regulatory dimension of the institutional environment –
measured as the number of days it takes to legally start a new business and enforce a business contract –
impacts both opportunity and necessity entrepreneurship while the normative dimension (assessed as the level
of government intervention) is only related to total level of entrepreneurial activity and opportunity-based
entrepreneurship. We do not find any support for the link between the cognitive, culturally-based institutional
dimension and entrepreneurship. (For more information, please contact: Rakesh Sambharya, Rutgers University
- Camden, USA: sambhary@camden.rutgers.edu)
The Impact of National Culture, Type of Entrepreneurs on Outsourcing
Shouming Chen, Tongji University
Arpita Joardar, Clark University
Sibin Wu, University of Texas-Pan American
In this paper, we seek to answer two important questions. First, why does outsourcing go to countries with
heavy entrepreneurial activities Second, how are entrepreneurs related to outsourcing success We argue that
national cultures determine what type of entrepreneurs a country tends to produce. We contend that the
number of entrepreneurs does not matter, but the type of entrepreneurs, promoters vs. trustees, does to
outsourcing success. Specifically, we propose that promoters tend to outsource more. We also suggest that
promoters are likely to select the wrong vendor, but they also find hidden cost quicker, find an exit strategy
faster and tend to have more control of their outsourced activities. (For more information, please contact: Sibin
Wu, University of Texas-Pan American, USA: sibinwu@utpa.edu)
AIB 2012 Conference Proceedings
Page 113